Are all feature productions this stingy with audio?

D

Dustin P Wilson-Henry

Member
Today I just turned down a job for a feature. Having never worked on a feature before, doing mostly television, I was wondering for those of you that had, if the following was normal. When I talked to the UPM, she was quick to inform me that they were willing to pay $500 a week for my services and my audio package. This was for 6 days a week at "standard" film days of 12 hours plus. I had to pay for my own transportation to the location, and pay for my own lodgings. I tried to negotiate with the executive producer but he told me the budget was firm. Is it just me or does all of this sound completely low ball?

Sort of venting and trying to figure out how those of you who do film work manage to get by if this is standard.
-Dustin
 
Depending on where you are, that isn't even minimum wage.

They ought to be ashamed for even wasting your time with that kind of nonsense. You are a skilled professional with a specialized equipment package, not a fugitive on the run looking for under-the-table work.

What really burns me about things like this is that they're so commonplace because some aspiring sound recordist will agree to do the work for such an abbusive rate, thinking that its their big break. The fact is when you work for peanuts, you'll be expected to work for the same rate on future projects.

I don't mind working on the ocassional freebee, but never anything longer than six minutes. Anything longer than that, and they'd better be a registered charity with a tax receipt in-hand.
 
All I would say is anyone that would be willing to invest that little into something as important as their location sound, I would not want to be associated with. I am sure I would not want my name on the credits of this production. You made the right decision.
 
Last edited:
It's standard for low-ball productions, and there are plenty of them.

They're fishing for bottom feeders. If you're pro with experience and pro gear, you should keep very busy asking $400-500/day (at least in my #20 DMA market)
 
Other than on total no budget shorts for people I know I have never worked for that rate. Even documentaries pay around $500 / day. Now post is where they usually try to get away with that kind of fee.
 
Well, if you are building experience and a resume, then you might want to do it, but if you have experience, then no, leave it to all the final cut kids just out of film school...
 
I too agree with your decision to turn that job down. They weren't going to pay you enough, easy as that. Besides the fact that transportation and lodgings weren't covered either.

"Real" features are union. It's almost non-existant to have a big budget feature be non-union. Just about everything on a union show is regulated.

See here for what you generally should have gotten, or to use as a guide for the future. Look under Members---->Wages---->Majors Post Production Agreement: www.editorsguild.com
 
Last edited:
first let me say, that i work as a professional editor and won't take less than $600/day when hired by one of the major studios... $800 if i'm producing too. as a shooter, it's $1100/day. that's a minimum. I also charge for bay rental and media storage and anything else i can think of to squeeze as much dough as i can out of them. but when it comes to low budget indies, I take a good hard look at what their making and the ideas behind it. if it's something I genuinely believe in, I waive my fee. I'm currently the colorist on a production that ran out of money in post simply because I watched their feature and wanted to be a part of it. these are filmmakers on a path and i very much want to be a part of what they're doing.

so looking at it from their perspective, some indie filmmakers do what they need to do to get their films made. a payment like you described is essentially a token payment that says if we had the money we'd pay you a full rate, but we believe in this project so we're pushing it forward and asking you to come along. i'm sure they "know" what they are asking of you, to make a sacrifice for the good of the project. if it's not a project you believe in, you did the right thing by passing. no one wants a disgruntled "for hire" on set bringing morale down.

as producer, i've had the pleasure of seeking out and hiring talented, passionate "amateurs" to fill many key roles on my productions and its precisely their lack of so-called professionalism that drives an enthusiasm to do their absolute best, offer ideas and work their asses off for the good of the picture. frankly, its often the "pros" i've hired that do just enough to cover their own. but these "amateurs", they became like family and i think of them like family, despite the fact that we met through an interview process for an underpaid gig. and here they are on the last day of shooting in Death Valley...

img3979ei6cm3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Bad vibe, good you turned it down.

I think it's largely about respect. I'm putting together a short film right now and was looking to hire a DP/Gaffer unit. I was providing all camera and audio equipment and I needed them mostly for lighting and such. I met them for a good friend and told them that the budget was tight (actually, non-existent at that point) and they said that, because I was friends with this other fellow, they'd be willing to go as low as $100 a day a piece (which I know is VERY low). I thanked them profusely and told them I knew what a break they were giving me. The next thing I set out to do was to make sure that their part of the budget would be the first thing covered and, if need be, covered from my own pocket if neccesary because I knew that they were doing me a favor. Thankfully it looks like a budget will come through (knock on wood, don't get too excited) and I've just called to let them know again how much I'm in their debt for taking below their usual rate.

Now, for me as a shooter, I bring an HVX200 package, Cartoni Tripod, and an AT4073a mic with boom. I'm in north Louisiana now though where, unfortunatly, not many people have HD equipment so I can't charge a whole lot. For a government agency or big company, my rate is $400 a day for all of the above equipment (though getting a boom operator will cost them extra). For a friend or someone who I think I could use a favor from later, I'm more than happy to knock $100 off. Also, anything charitable or for a good cause I'd gladly waive my fee (even though I need the money I think I need some more good deeds under my belt before I die). I'm actually planning to shoot and edit a public service announcement for a shelter for battered women over the summer and that will be totally free since it's something which I think is very important.

I guess what I'm getting at is that working for cheap or nothing under the right circumstances can be useful/rewarding. I know that I'll owe my DP/Gaffer a favor later on and I've been building up favors from others so they can help me out with my short film. It seems what went wrong here was that these guys treated you like any other pro but didn't want to pay you like a pro. They could have at least TRIED to find some lodging with a friend or something for you. It seems they just weren't interested in making it work and creating a solid relationship. It already screwed them over with you and I have a feeling they're going to be burning other bridges as they go on (or get a cheap as crap, amateur-ish production).

All that said, you don't happen to know a sound guy in Northern LA who's willing to work for free? :D
 
I worked on a student film once, but the director was a selectee (is that a word?) in AFI's women's directors program. The sound guy, DP, ward drobe, all of them, even the actors were people with legit credits. It was all good will and it was a lot of work too. So, what Zak says sounds good to me.
Look at the script, the players, you might be part of something really special.
 
OK, for post I have done jobs for little to nothing because I believed in them and there is one production thing I do that is just covering expenses. So I may have been too harsh but I wasn't getting the feeling from what you say that this would be one of my exceptions. So do check it out. All of the projects I've done for cheap, they knew it was for cheap. They knew they were getting much more than they were paying for and were appreciative. The dark side is the outfits who are being cheap and think they are doing you a favor to let you work on their "great" project. I have dealt with plenty of those. Thankfully, other than a few theatre gigs when I was young and stupid, I have opted out of these kinds of gigs.
Odds are the film will go nowhere. That has nothing to do with how good the film actually turns out, it's just the hard reality that very few films go anywhere that would be a career boost. So find out if there is some reason YOU want to do the gig. It's not money and it's not likely to be fame (your doing sound so even if it's a hit it is extremely unlikely to be a career boost). It might be that these are people you want to work with in the future and they have potential, maybe it will be a chance for you to learn some specific thing???
Don't do it for the money - there isn't any really. Don't do it because it will be "fun" - it's going to be stressful and often boring and a lot of work... and some will be fun maybe. Don't do it for great stories - they always come from disasters and as fun as it is to tell them most of the time you would rather not have the good story. Don't do it because your going to make money down the line - it's not impossible but you would be better off buying lottery tickets than taking a percentage on an indi film (not that I have never done it but...). Don't do it for fame - your in sound, get over it. You probably can't name three top mixers off the top of your head, one maybe - AND they get Oscars. If I eliminate Ben Burt most people couldn't name a sound designer, maybe even if I left him in... Anyway you get the point.
There are good reasons to do a way under paid gig. If you find some for this film AND you can afford to do the gig, go for it.
 
You did the right thing Dusty and, No, not all indy's are incompetent with their productions. Of course there is a trend over the last 10 years to burden the financing of a indy picture on the crew and talent instead of the producers doing their job and raising financing beforehand.

Are they lazy, naive, or just completely disrespectful of your time? Doesn't really matter, you don't want to work for anyone of the above. There is NO excuse for not raising the funds for a professional production.

If this were a situation of a bunch of friends wanting to make a movie, ala Kevin Smith, then they can utilize their friends and put their OWN money into it. How much can they really believe in their work if they won't invest their money to get it done properly?

Don't be swayed by the argument that they can sell this after it is completed. If they don't have the knowledge (or patience) to raise financing they won't know how to sell the finished product which is actually much harder (and can take years). And that is assuming it ever is completed and watchable. Even the most perfect script of all time can be destroyed a million different ways throughout a production.

People like you described above are predators of this industry searching out suckers to pay for their 'get rich and famous quick' schemes. They are not the "standard."

If you really want to break into movies then search out a professional mixer and offer your services as a boom op or sound utility person. We are always on the look out for responsible and talented people to hire. You will make contacts and money. It won't take long before you will be getting your own work.

Good luck
 
wabbit said:
years). And that is assuming it ever is completed and watchable.
Click to expand...

I can poke some holes in wabbit's argument, for example raising money takes a certain skill set that not everyone has and there are lots of examples of good movies that run out of money. Like "Narc." Having said that, the no budget film I worked on, despite some of the credible names and reps attached was still unfinished 3 years after the shoot. I don't think they ever finished it.
 
I take those sorts of offers as an insult. I am a professional and have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into my gear. I have sweated, clawed and learned my craft over decades. I have a mortgage, two kids, a wife, a dog, a cat and lots of bills. I will not work at minimum wage or below, go find someone desperate or untalented enough who will. There are plenty of them out there, especially in LA.

I hate to say it, but it is becoming more and more rare to receive regular offers at your regular day rate or the standard day rate, there are too many kids coming out of film school who are hungry and desparate or mommy and daddy pay their bills. They have gear, not necessarily the skills and they don't care what they make.

I only do freebies for friends, as I am doing this weekend. This friend has given me a lot of work, connections and help over the years so I am re-paying his generosity with my skills, camera, grip and lighting package for free. Because he deserves it, it's a self-financed art project and it will be fun.

There are plenty of non-union "real" gigs, with professional top notch people and crews.

There also a lot of producers out there who just low ball everyone until they reel in a sucker.

Dan
 
Last edited:
i look forward to the day when equipment is so cheap that the so-called "professionalism" of this artform can finally be obliterated. what did Coppola say about a little fat girl in ohio picking up her daddy's video camera and being the next mozart?
 
Zak Forsman said:
i look forward to the day when equipment is so cheap that the so-called "professionalism" of this artform can finally be obliterated. what did Coppola say about a little fat girl in ohio picking up her daddy's video camera and being the next mozart?
Click to expand...

I don't think the little girl was suppose to be fat ;)

But that day is already here. Anyone can shoot and edit a film for the price of any other moderate priced hobby.

The problem is not about somebody being unable to express themselves artistically through film but the use of people who have spent years practicing their craft being compensated for their time and "professionalism"

You don't ask your plumber to take deffered pay until you can sell your house, get a job, whatever. A retaurant doesn't pay it's suppliers and empolyees IF they make a profit. You use somebody's professional services you pay for them. If you don't believe that you the job you need filled requires professional skills then grab your grandma or best friend and get the job done.

Not a lot of other business provide the ability to negotiate a professionals day rate. You don't offer your plumber $25 less an hour then his normal rate. While it is a result of the supply vs demand in this business it has not gotten to the point where someone should accept less then McDonald's rates for their services AND equipment.

Of course none of this stands in opposition to groups of people deciding to collaborate on non-professional projects. That is the life blood of forums like this, but people shouldn't have any delusions on that being a path to fame and fortune. It is just good fun.

Cheers
 
brianluce said:
I can poke some holes in wabbit's argument, for example raising money takes a certain skill set that not everyone has and there are lots of examples of good movies that run out of money. Like "Narc." Having said that, the no budget film I worked on, despite some of the credible names and reps attached was still unfinished 3 years after the shoot. I don't think they ever finished it.
Click to expand...

Going overbudget is another issue altogether. Never having a realistic budget is simply a disaster from the word go.

The skill set that it takes to raise money and sell a film are two sides of the same coin. 90% is developing the contacts that serves you on both ends.

Does anyone honestly believe you can find a producer who knows how to sell a film (a job skill that is money in the bank) will sign onto a picture that won't develop a budget?

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top